Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

As regards petitioner No. 1, there is ample evidence led by the complainant during her preliminary evidence before the trial Court, which would prima-facie make out the commission of the offence, for which he has been summoned by the Court vide order dated 22.03.2010. As per the preliminary evidence, it appears that the ex-parte decrees were obtained by this petitioner in connivance with accused Suresh, Sunder Singh and Ram Karan. This is apparent from order dated 25.03.2008 setting aside the ex-parte decrees. That apart, orders of dismissal from service of Sunder Singh from the post of Process Server after a regular departmental enquiry, has been placed on record by the respondent. It has been stated by the counsel for the respondent that Ram Karan has also been dismissed from service after holding a regular departmental enquiry, who was also a Process Server. The judgments relied upon by the counsel for the petitioners would not be applicable to the case of petitioner No. 1 as in the light of the preliminary evidence, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against petitioner No. 1 in the complaint. Accordingly, the prayer made by him in the present petition cannot be accepted.